Hate crimes bill covering sexual orientation, gender identity passes US House, President promises veto

A federal hate-crimes bill protecting sexual orientation and gender identity passed the US House of Reps recently. Readers of this blog will remember Andrew Anthos of Detroit, whose murdere uttered homophobic slurs. Hundreds of people in this country alone are targeted every year based on their sexual orientation or gender identity, real or perceived. No hate crimes legislation can stop the hate, but it can at least send society's message of disapproval for targeted violence. Given Americans' propensity to seek punitive criminal justice solutions, we should be OK with this.

However, a morally-bankrupt President Bush, under pressure from conservatives, has promised to veto the bill. It did not pass with enough votes to overcome a veto.

A long-stalled bill that would expand the federal hate crime law to cover violent acts based on a victim's gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability is headed for approval in the Democratic-controlled Congress but faces a White House veto threat.

The House on Thursday approved the measure, the first major expansion of the hate crime statute since it was enacted in 1968. Senate approval is expected soon, putting the controversial bill on the president's desk for the first time since it was proposed nearly a decade ago.

Under intense pressure from conservative religious organizations to derail the bill, the White House on Thursday called it "unnecessary and constitutionally questionable," issuing the latest in a string of veto threats aimed at the congressional Democratic majority.

The measure was spurred by a number of high-profile incidents, including the 1998 killing of Matthew Shepard, a gay college student who was brutally beaten in Wyoming and left to die tied to a fence.

Shepard's mother, Judy, who lobbied for the bill's passage, addressed House Democrats shortly before the vote and watched the debate from the gallery. "I'm so relieved. It's been a long time," she said afterward.

Opponents of the legislation raised a few interesting, but morally-bankrupt arguments:

Opponents argue that the bill would create special classes of federally protected crime victims. "If someone commits a crime, they should be punished for that crime. Period," said Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.). "Today the Democratic majority has chosen to end equality under the law."

Added Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas): "Justice should be blind to the personal traits of victims."

Additionally, Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition had this to say:

The House vote "slapped Christians in the face," said Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition.

She criticized the bill for creating "two new federally protected minority groups" based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

It is idiots like the Traditional Values Coalition whose actions constitute a slap in the face to Christians interested in human rights.